One hundred days of terror and grief and sadness and fear and disappointment, right, the whole "pity party" that some people seem to love to accuse unfortunate others of, should they have the audacity to speak of their plight, and risk ruining the party everyone else is at.
In the first excruciatingly painful days after they took Brindi, in a state of horror, I was even more horrified to learn about a dog that was held in the SPCA pound for eight months or so in 2007.
My reaction to the rest of the story was filtered by a visceral response to the gut-slash of those words that hasn't left me since.
Months? Months?? NO WAY.
The rest of the story got worse with every word. I've mentioned it here before. And sorry to say, I am no closer to connecting with the owner of this poor creature than I was back then, not for lack of trying, either.
The story goes, this unknown dog, mixed-breed, had an unfortunate encounter with another dog, which happened to be a greyhound. The greyhound is fine today; the mixed-breed is dead.
The dog was accused of one attack on another dog. Never attacked or threatened a human being. The other dog however had some sort of a minor bite, The bigger problem was a number of skin lesions it sustained. Apparently, greyhounds have very thin skin,that easily tears off during a scuffle just from rolling around on the ground. I saw the photo: the dog was covered with roundish patches where the skin had been lost, like big polka dots. It was a mess. But unless an infection set in, the injuries were not likely to be fatal.
The rest of the story is that this dog waited eight months or thereabouts during a court case mounted by the owner against the city. It may be that like me, he was never charged with any offense. He lost the case, but went right back to court to appeal.
Then he lost the appeal. And he decided enough was enough. He had to give in.
He was never granted the right to visit his dog at the pound. He was given two days to spend with his pet, nd then animal services (as in funeral services, I suppose) came and took the dog away again - where? - and put it down.
This story is so horrific one doubts it is true. But I know it's true: my first lawyer represented the owner. And I saw the photos.
Then he lost the appeal. And he decided enough was enough. He had to give in.
He was never granted the right to visit his dog at the pound. He was given two days to spend with his pet, nd then animal services (as in funeral services, I suppose) came and took the dog away again - where? - and put it down.
This story is so horrific one doubts it is true. But I know it's true: my first lawyer represented the owner. And I saw the photos.
What I will never understand is why this story didn't go anywhere. It never made it into the papers or the TV or the radio or the blogs of animal advocates or anywhere that I can see. It is simply not to be found. Unfortunately, my lawyer declined to give me the name of his former client.
When I heard that awful story I was absolutely determined to make sure my dog would not even spend a month behind bars, let alone be put down. Not this dog. I would rather die first. I will go to the pound and stand in line for the injection.
So now where am I? One hundred days - perhaps a day more or less, I cannot sit with a calendar and count precisely, I don't have the strength. One hundred days of utter agony with no end in sight.
One hundred days for Brindi, one hundred days for me. In many ways I suffer more, having the great misfortune of being able to understand human language. I don't understand humans, though, at all.
When I heard that awful story I was absolutely determined to make sure my dog would not even spend a month behind bars, let alone be put down. Not this dog. I would rather die first. I will go to the pound and stand in line for the injection.
So now where am I? One hundred days - perhaps a day more or less, I cannot sit with a calendar and count precisely, I don't have the strength. One hundred days of utter agony with no end in sight.
One hundred days for Brindi, one hundred days for me. In many ways I suffer more, having the great misfortune of being able to understand human language. I don't understand humans, though, at all.
Brindi certainly knows something is up, I suppose she must feel my agony, too. Fortunately for her, she doesn't know all the intentions involved; she probably thinks she'll be there forever, as she must have believed after spending two years in a shelter. And she'd accept that with good humor, knowing her.
But I have other knowledge of what is going on and what is meant to happen, and it is incredibly damaging to my soul. It is already a soul-killing experience to be forced to live without her. To suffer and know she is suffering, yet have to move forward, for one hundred days and who knows how much longer? I am suffering in more ways than I can talk about, and for more reasons than I am able to reveal. In more ways, in fact, than I even want to reveal to myself.
Does the city intend to actually destroy dog owners along with their dogs? Well, it's working.
Does the city intend to actually destroy dog owners along with their dogs? Well, it's working.
In case anybody wants to help, I am asking for daily calls to Mayor Kelly and especially to Animal Services. The numbers are (902) 490 4010 and 490 1791, respectively.
Email does nothing; they delete it. A human voice is harder to ignore.
Call every day if you can, it doesn't take long, and it can really help. Please request that they meet with me, and that they let Brindi go, and reign in their free-wheeling interpretation of A300, because a muzzle order is NOT a mandate to automatically euthanize for violations, not under that law - not by any stretch of the imagination.
Keep in mind: Animal Services does not actually have to meet with me or anybody in order to let Brindi go; it needs no judge or jury. It can review its own decision and the process leading to it, anytime it likes. There is no law or rule or policy or limit on their ability to do this - despite what they may tell the public. It may be hard to accept, but it's a lot easier than having to testify in court.
Posts
how does it help if i call? won't it just annoy them, they don't seem to listen to reason
ReplyDeleteGood question, thank you.
ReplyDeleteYou are right; calls will probably annoy them. And they probably won't listen to reason, either. That's okay. They still have to listen to the calls, and the calls will let them know how strongly other people feel; when they add up, they help keep the issue alive. It's the squeaky wheel principle. AS are betting I will soon run out of energy, money, and time, and give up on Brindi. Usually it works. We need to show them that it won't work this time around!
I called. they were very polite and informative. they seem to want this issue resolved as well and said they are trying to move it ahead as fast as they can for everyone's sake and for the best interest of the dog. that is something at least. they said you were wrong actually with them being able to do someting on their own. she was not being vicious about it, just stating the facts. she said the dog was in good mental health. She was compassionate and took her time and informative.
ReplyDeleteI am very happy to hear this. Thank you for taking the time to call and write about it.
ReplyDeleteGive what you heard, I really wonder why they are not willing to meet with me, when their lawyer is willing, to move foward. And I am told by people in the know that like any branch of law enforcement, AS has a lot of latitude, thanks to powers granted under By-Law A300. The "regular" police often drop charges after they arrest somebody, based on lack of evidence or discovery of other factors.
No matter; the important thing is that they got your call and you were able to speak to a real person.
Thanks again! I hope the calls keep coming.
yes, i was suprised at the level of compassion i recieved. i was emotional but this woman seemed a voice of reason, which i really wasn't prepared for. another thing i forgot to mention was that she said they are trying to move the case along as fast as possible. she wasn't just blowing smoke to get me off the phone either. i do not know what this means to you... but as an outsider looking in, i did not get the impression that anyone had some sort of powerplay going on. i hope this helps, and stay strong, i wait everyday for the great stories you will tell when you have your Brindi back.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what specific things she can say what they are actually doing to move things along? Showing up at a meeting with us last August, or even last week, could have resolved the case already. The city lawyer is very slow to respond to calls and letters from my lawyer.Things stood still when he was on vacation, etc. They declined every single request of mine to date (see my post, "Another Let-down"). As a result this has dragged on for over three months, and may drag on to Christmas, with Brindi locked up the entire time.
ReplyDeleteDo you recall her name - Andrea Macdonald, or Lori Scolero?
i do not know who it was. i don't know what to tell you about your heartbreaking efforts, only relaying the message. i was just so happy that her mental health was ok and she was getting lots of attention. i asked if i was allowed to go see Brindi and no i wasn't. it sounds like until it is resolved everyone is scared to do anything. silly. not sure who is makeing these rules
ReplyDeleteI find it so funny, as in odd, that so many folks think that the ban on visits to Brindi applies only to me. So many people asked "Can't I go walk Brindi?" or "Can't I go see her?"
ReplyDeleteWhy would that be okay? If a dog is declared dangerous to as a basis for an order to euthanize, how could she simply be adopted out somebody else with no further ado, let alone allowed on walks with members of the public? Sort of undermines the "dangerous" part, doesn't it??
Take her out of the country? Forget it. They have her; they took her on HRM territory, and that's that. The city doesn't even want her taken out of HRM. At the very start, I mean, a day or two after the seizure, they refused permission to take her to a training farm out of town.
Similarly - some are convinced that HRM politicians are only forbidden to talk to me about her, not to others. Guess again. (They'd better not be, let's put it that way!)
Others are sure all that's needed is for somebody else to go adopt her. Hardly.
Dogs in any pound are kept from all outside contact, normally - except owners, in most places. Volunteers are not even supposed to see them, only the paid employees of the SPCA are allowed to care for them - or so I am told. It is true that the poundkeeper - aka SPCA - has the power to adopt dogs out, but only strays, as far as I know - not dogs accused of being dangerous.
The idea that it's not okay for me, but it's okay for others, strikes me as so odd, because I was not charged with anything. To this day, very few know or realize this. Not that I blame them; the media missed this entirely, and for a while so did I. A lot of effort went toward making me feel like a criminal, though. Animal Services officials refused to take my calls or answer my letters, and when I visited them in person, they gave me some very dirty looks, I have to say.
Brindi was simply sentenced to death. Contrary to rules, contrary to logic. Neither she nor I was never given the opportunity to participate in a hearing, investigation, or appeal.
You are right, it is very silly. The truth is, nobody is as scared about this as I am. The tragic case from last year gives the city all the reassurance it needs.
In the interim a pair of dogs got loose and slaughtered a few pet rabbits. AS took one of them to the pound temporarily and promptly gave it back to the owner. Then a few weeks later the dogs got loose again and killed a number of chickens - after tearing open their cage.
This must have caused a lot of embarassment. AS had to explain why it returned the dogs in the first place. The answer? Because they had no "disposition" on the dog - i.e., no behavioural assessment. Good argument for having assessments done, don't you think? Apparently not quite.
i didn't mean it like that --sorry. only could i go look at her with my own eyes to see for myself that she was ok. but you are 100 completely right--if it is not ok for you it is not ok for anyone. you have done nothing wrong. this is a horrible horrible situation. it could have been anyone, such as the mayor--you were just the unfortunate one.
ReplyDeleteHow would the woman answering the phone know how Brindi is doing. She is not kept at the same facility and the people answering the phone do not visit Brindi. Of course this is a power trip. A.Control does not want to admit that this was a mistake.
ReplyDelete